SubstanceAmount.amount should support Ratio

XMLWordPrintableJSON

    • Type: Change Request
    • Resolution: Not Persuasive
    • Priority: Medium
    • FHIR Core (FHIR)
    • STU3
    • Biomedical Research & Regulation
    • Substance
    • Hide

      SubstanceAmount datatype has now been removed, so this is no longer relevant. I propose this can now be rejected as "Not Related"

      Show
      SubstanceAmount datatype has now been removed, so this is no longer relevant. I propose this can now be rejected as "Not Related"
    • Rik Smithies / Peter Bomberg : 24-0-0

      Why Range and Ratio inconsistent?

      • Quantity, Range, Ratio, string @ SubstanceDefinition.relationship.amount[x]
        * Quantity, Range, string @ SubstanceAmount.amount[x]
        * Quantity, Range, string @ SubstanceReferenceInformation.target.amount[x]
        * Quantity, string @ SubstanceDefinition.moiety.amount[x]
        * Quantity, string @ SubstanceDefinition.property.amount[x]

      Given that amountType allows for a Ratio, it would appear to be justified here. BR&R should review the other choice lists for consistency too

            Assignee:
            Unassigned
            Reporter:
            Grahame Grieve (Inactive)
            Watchers:
            3 Start watching this issue

              Created:
              Updated:
              Resolved: